US Claims World Is Safer Because War On Terror

As usual the recalcitrant elements seek to mortify us by peddling fanciful delusions.
The usual victim is the US-Saudi Arabia, the Carlyle group and other such "embodiments of evil".

I have explained the position in Saudi Arabia over and over again on this forum but with little use, apparently the present proponent of this delusional peice would like to believe in that the dark and evil nation of America is taking over the world while he stands up for the good, spreads the light- The Moses complex!
Why believe that the world is more complicated than black and white when charecterizing everything that one doesnt understand as evil is so much more simpler.

The USA buys its oil from where its available not where it wants.

personally id rather have another terrorist attack then give up even one inch of freedom or one inch of the constitution.

they either dont hate freedom and want revenge. or as boatphone suggests they hate freedom...in that case they are winning the battle without having to throw another stone. why should they attack our freedoms, our politicians are doing a good enough job of that on their own?

But truth is they arent fighting against freedom, mainly because the only reason they attacked spain is because spain sided with us on the war on terror. A good majority of the time, they are attacking for a reason. Why aren't they attacking every single democracy in the world then? Why would they tell spain there would be no more attacks on them if they backed out of the war on terror aka stopped siding with the US? to me that doesnt sound like a war on freedom. That sounds more like a war on the US and israel, not because they are "free" but because of the actions they either intentionally or unintentionally did, which either one it doesn't matter because they still did them. Anybody that sides with the US gets attacked, it can't get any more clear then that. And the US sides with Israel which is why they are so pissed off.

*getting off of israel*
point being, I think we can all agree that this isn't a war for freedom, rather imperialism. We can't be fighting for freedom, the Iran bit from 1953 would prove that. We could have made it a democracy but I don't think it would have went the way we wanted, so we made a pro US dictator. Which led to the 1979 revolution, which because there was a revolution, gave saddam the balls to attack. That kills millions, saddam ends up using chemical weapons like mustard gas that we sold them. millions are dead, who lost in all of this? THE PEOPLE, or as you would call them now, the terrorists.

Originally posted by grimreaper797
personally id rather have another terrorist attack then give up even one inch of freedom or one inch of the constitution.

Another terrorist attack would hurt the U.S. and our citizens psychologically and physically. It could very well cause a collapse in the economy, and fyi, that is not good...

Originally posted by grimreaper797
But truth is they arent fighting against freedom,

i already showed you a link in which Islamic extremists were protesting in Britain, and they specifically say among some other things "Freedom go to hell", etc, etc....

Originally posted by grimreaper797
mainly because the only reason they attacked spain is because spain sided with us on the war on terror. A good majority of the time, they are attacking for a reason. Why aren't they attacking every single democracy in the world then? Why would they tell spain there would be no more attacks on them if they backed out of the war on terror aka stopped siding with the US? to me that doesnt sound like a war on freedom.

Really?.... That shows once again that you are not informed of the situation...even after the government in Spain was changed to a socialist government and they took their troops out of Iraq, Islamic terrorists kept trying to make terrorist attacks in Spain...

Originally posted by grimreaper797
Anybody that sides with the US gets attacked, it can't get any more clear then that. And the US sides with Israel which is why they are so pissed off.

Well, France was one of those countries that was against the war in Iraq....let's see the response from Islamic terrorists shall we?...

Al-Qaida terror plot foiled, say French police

Jon Henley in Paris
Monday January 12, 2004
The Guardian


The French police are convinced that their country has escaped a planned chemical or biological attack by an Islamist cell linked to al-Qaida.
An interior ministry official said evidence from Islamist militants arrested in the Lyon area last week made it "very plain" that an attack with the deadly botulism or ricin toxins was being actively prepared.
..................

"After last year's arrests we thought we were dealing with a group planning bomb attacks on Russian interests, and possibly supplying false papers, money and lodgings to Chechens," an investigator said.

"It now seems a cell around the Benchellali family was trying to manufacture chemical and biological weapons for attacks around Europe."

www.guardian.co.uk...

There was another major attacked which was planned for France in 2000 and luckily it was stopped also... I have given several times news from Europe, not only Spain, about what Islamic extremists have been trying to do over there.

Originally posted by grimreaper797
point being, I think we can all agree that this isn't a war for freedom, rather imperialism.

Tsk, tsk...so now you are trying to think for other people and speak for them?....

BTW, the 3/11 attacks were at first actually prepared to be executed in France, not in Spain, but they changed plans and decided to do it in Spain.

[edit on 12-5-2006 by Muaddib]

Originally posted by Muaddib
Hey could you tell people around here why is it that Osama Bin Laden has vowed to destroy the House of Saud?....

Im my Humble Opinion there is no more a Man called Osama Bin Laden.

But that is just my Humble Opinion - which makes Your and the Official US goverment theories collapse like a castle of cards.

You cannot expect changes to come in the blink of an eye. Yes, it is true that there are many problems in Saudi Arabia, but they are changing slowly for the better. But since this does not fit in with the view of the souljah.....

So - how come that Iraqi Dictatorship Regime led by Saddam deserved a "Liberation" - and the Saudi Regime, which is almost as bad as Saddams, does not?

So - how come that the Taliban Regime in Afganistan, deserved a "Liberation" - and Saudi Regime, which is the Heart of Sha'ria Law, from which the Taliban took their Laws, does not?

Oh - let's REFRESH our Memories.

First - House of Saud.

Second - House of Bin Laden.

Third - Carlyle Group.

Final - Oil.

All comes down to one Common Denominator - have you already guessed what it is?

Yep, as usual;

MONEY!

Originally posted by Souljah

Im my Humble Opinion there is no more a Man called Osama Bin Laden.

Yet, you keep bringing up the "House of bin Laden". Odd.

So - how come that Iraqi Dictatorship Regime led by Saddam deserved a "Liberation" - and the Saudi Regime, which is almost as bad as Saddams, does not?

The Saudi government was and is heloing us in the war on terror, and as we already explained all u.s. presidents must keep good relations with saudi arabia because our nation depends on oil.

Iraq was not helping the U.S. fight the war on terror, and was most likely aiding the terroists. Also, Saddam invaded other nations, and fired on U.S. war planes in the north & south no-fly-zones.

Second - House of Bin Laden.

Didn't you just say that there was no bin Laden?

Final - Oil.

Um, of course! Why do you think this is somehow wrong? We need oil!

-- Boat

[edit on 12-5-2006 by Boatphone]

apparently boatphone you dont know that there are other bin ladens then osama...you might refer to such people as the house of bin laden....interesting isnt it how bin laden family has ties to bush. just showing that there is a difference between osama bin laden and the house of bin laden.

also maybe if people didn't freak out and stop going out the economy wouldnt have been hurt so bad. secure our borders, ports, and everything else. Whatever is already here we should just prepare for the worst. We will get through it, or else how stable is our country?

anyway my computer crashed so i wont be in to respond anytime soon. im on a computer somewhere else right now, and this will probably be my last post in this thread. Ill be doing the same for my other threads, and hope that I can round up some money in the future to buy a new PC. have fun justifying wiretapping and everything else that goes against the foundations of this nation.

Too bad people like Mauddib don't believe peace as a way to solve things...we all have to be cowboys to win. Well just remember...live by the sword...die by the sword. Right now we are running around sword drawn, swinging at anyone that looks at us wrong (suspected terrorists). Don't be surprised when you find a sword sticking out of our backs. later.

Originally posted by grimreaper797
apparently boatphone you dont know that there are other bin ladens then osama...you might refer to such people as the house of bin laden....interesting isnt it how bin laden family has ties to bush. just showing that there is a difference between osama bin laden and the house of bin laden.

First of all the Bin Laden family disavowed Osama...

Second of all even Osama Bin Laden is going after members of his own family because many of them have embraced the western way of life.

Third the Bin Laden family has a worldwide business with offices in Sweden and Britain (if I remember correctly) They have a construction company which is one of the largest in the world, so pretty much every government has some sort of connection to them.

Last but not least, I keep proving you wrong, yet you keep coming with more "opinion" of your own which has nothing to do with reality.

Islamic extremists are out there and they want to destroy everything that the west represents, whether you want to believe it or not.

---edited for errors---

[edit on 13-5-2006 by Muaddib]

Originally posted by Boatphone
Yet, you keep bringing up the "House of bin Laden". Odd.

If you are not aware, the Bin Laden Familiy is REALLY big - Salem Bin Laden has 54 Children with various Wifes; one of these 54 Children WAS Osama.

The Saudi government was and is heloing us in the war on terror, and as we already explained all u.s. presidents must keep good relations with saudi arabia because our nation depends on oil.

Yes - what a Great answer. And meanwhile, they can practice Sha'ria law, worse kind that the "TERRORIST TALIBAN" regime had in Afganistan - yet they do not deserve a Regime change, since the current Saudi Regime is PRO-business and PRO-American; and Iraqi and Afgani regimes were Not.

Simply put - it just has a lot to do with Business and Money.

Not at all with any kind of Democracy, Liberty and Justice for All.

Iraq was not helping the U.S. fight the war on terror, and was most likely aiding the terroists. Also, Saddam invaded other nations, and fired on U.S. war planes in the north & south no-fly-zones.

What Iraq was doing, is selling their Big Oil reserves in Petro-Euros, which slowly decreased the value of Dollar on international money bourse. That was his "Terrorist" Crime - that he was not PRO-Business and not PRO-American; which ofcourse made him a Terrorist Regime, eventhoug US goverment supported Saddam with alot of money, weapons and technology, when he was fighting the bigger and stronger Iran. Basicly making him nothing but Pawn in the Dirty Game of Middle East Geo-Politics led by ALL post-WW2 US Goverments.

Didn't you just say that there was no bin Laden?

But there is still this BIG Family.

Very Influental.

Very Powerful.

VERY Rich.

Bin Laden family

The immensely wealthy bin Laden family (Arabic: بن لادن), intimately connected with the innermost circles of the Saudi royal family was thrown into prominence through the activities of Osama bin Laden. The bin Laden family own and operate a global corporation annually grossing 5 billion U.S. dollars, based upon the largest construction firm in the Islamic world, with offices in London and Geneva.

The two closest friends of King Fahd were Prince Mohammed ben Abdullah (son of Abdul Aziz ibn Saud's youngest brother) who died in the early 1980s and Salem bin Laden who died in 1988, when a plane that he was flying flew into some powerlines in San Antonio, Texas.

Originally posted by Souljah
.............
Simply put - it just has a lot to do with Business and Money.

Not at all with any kind of Democracy, Liberty and Justice for All.
.............

Right souljah....it doesn't have anything to do with the regime of Saddam wanting to make terrorist attacks in U.S. soil, with the help of the Russians who made this possible and played both sides....

Russian President Vladimir Putin says that after the 9/11 attacks Moscow warned Washington that Saddam Hussein was planning attacks on the US.
He said Russia's secret service had information on more than one occasion that Iraq was preparing acts of terror in the US and its facilities worldwide.

news.bbc.co.uk...

I find it strange that you, and some other people, always try to dismiss all the evidence which contradicts your claims....yet the evidence is there and you can't make it go away souljah...

I am pretty sure you would also claim that the problem with the Iranian regime now has nothing to do with the president of Iran claiming Israel should be wiped off the map, and any country who doesn't allow Iran to have nuclear capabilities "will burn for it"... among some of the things he has said.

Keep your lies going souljah, I know at least some members can see what is really happening.

[edit on 13-5-2006 by Muaddib]

Originally posted by Muaddib
Right souljah....it doesn't have anything to do with the regime of Saddam wanting to make terrorist attacks in U.S. soil, with the help of the Russians who made this possible and played both sides....

Ofcourse he did!
And what would that Help him Exactly?
In case, that US goverment did not have an intention to remove Saddam's regime (even prior 9-11), they would surely create one IF he really wanted to "Attack US Soil". He attacked Kuwait, and look what happened then - so if he attacked USA, that would be a complete suicide. Kind of ILLOGICAL - but that is irrelevant; at least for you. The only thing that matters is, that Bush&Co. did Great in Iraq and Afganistan - and that the World is now SAFER, ofcourse.

I find it strange that you, and some other people, always try to dismiss all the evidence which contradicts your claims....yet the evidence is there and you can't make it go away souljah...

What EVIDENCE?

You mean the links you post are considered EVIDENCE?



Well if not anything else - you sure are Amuzing!

You can Keep your "Evidence" and show it to your Kind.

I am pretty sure you would also claim that the problem with the Iranian regime now has nothing to do with the president of Iran claiming Israel should be wiped off the map, and any country who doesn't allow Iran to have nuclear capabilities "will burn for it"... among some of the things he has said.

As I have stated many times before - don't hate the PLAYER, hate the GAME!

And this Game of Nuclear Rat Race, was invented mainly by the World Superpowers, such as USA, Russa, France, China. Iran did not INVENT this game that only the Big Boyz can play. They did not Create this False Nuclear Security, where Thousands of nuclear warheads stand for "Your Protection".

None of that was Invented by Iran.

So, why do you hate them so much?

Hate the GAME, Dude...

Keep your lies going souljah, I know at least some members can see what is really happening.

And you have a Very Nice Day!

boatphone i never said osama bin laden wasnt disowned, where did I state that? You are repeatedly misinterpreting what I'm saying. All I said is that there is a powerful family called bin laden and it just so happens osama was once part of that. Nowhere did I say osama was still part of that family. All I said is that this family of bin laden has a great relation with the bush family. that is where the reference "house of bin laden" comes from. the reason you are seeing it as opinion is because your not reading what I'm saying, just what you think I'm saying.

by the way I'm at the public Library, didn't know I could access ATS from these computers lol.

Originally posted by grimreaper797
boatphone i never said osama bin laden wasnt disowned

I never said that you said that. That ma have been a different poster.

there is a powerful family called bin laden and it just so happens osama was once part of that.

I agree I just don't see what you ment by "House of Bush, House of bin Laden" You stated it like it ment something...

by the way I'm at the public Library, didn't know I could access ATS from these computers lol.

Public Libraries are pretty enjoyable, at least we can agree on that.

-- Boat

Originally posted by Souljah

Ofcourse he did!
And what would that Help him Exactly?

Humm...let's see....How about revenge?.... It is not like the U.S. kicked Saddam's butt in the 90s and made him run for the hills right?...

Originally posted by Souljah
In case, that US goverment did not have an intention to remove Saddam's regime (even prior 9-11), they would surely create one IF he really wanted to "Attack US Soil".

WTH are you talking about?... The U.S. formed a coalition and went to oust Saddams regime...in case you didn't know...

Originally posted by Souljah
He attacked Kuwait, and look what happened then - so if he attacked USA, that would be a complete suicide. Kind of ILLOGICAL -

Yeah well except that we are talking about terrorist attacks....not an invasion by Saddam's forces...

Originally posted by Souljah
What EVIDENCE?

You mean the links you post are considered EVIDENCE?

Well if not anything else - you sure are Amuzing!

You can Keep your "Evidence" and show it to your Kind.

Right...the souljah doesn't want to believe what other countries have to say about Saddam's ties with terrorism, ties with Al Qaeda, or what other countries say about terrorism in their own soil, he just wants to listen to the "insurgents/terrorists" and try to place the blame on the U.S. for everything, even if it means exagerating, and lying... I forgot about that.

Originally posted by Souljah
As I have stated many times before - don't hate the PLAYER, hate the GAME!

And this Game of Nuclear Rat Race, was invented mainly by the World Superpowers, such as USA, Russa, France, China. Iran did not INVENT this game that only the Big Boyz can play. They did not Create this False Nuclear Security, where Thousands of nuclear warheads stand for "Your Protection".

None of that was Invented by Iran.

Right and the Iranian president has not stated that Israel should be wiped off the map, and that countries that try to stop Iran from acquiring nuclear technology will burn for it...among some of the other things he has claimed....

It is not like the president of Iran wants to bring the world into chaos so his 12th imam can come back and bring Islamic rule over the world....

Originally posted by Souljah
So, why do you hate them so much?

Hate the GAME, Dude...

I don't hate Iranians, in fact I know some Iranian engineers who work in the U.S. for the same company I work for. What i don't really like is that the Iranian regime has been stating for years, and now more than ever... You know things such as "wiping Israel off the map", "making those countries which have tried, and try to stop Iran from acquiring nuclear technology burn for it". Having a senior Mullah state "it is alright for Iran to acquire nuclear weapons and for Iran to use nuclear weapons"....

Originally posted by Muaddib
Humm...let's see....How about revenge?.... It is not like the U.S. kicked Saddam's butt in the 90s and made him run for the hills right?...

Revenge?



Dude - that sounds like a bad B Hollywood Movie!

Is that like, Saddam is the Ultimate Villain and Bush comes in to the Rescue?

WTH are you talking about?... The U.S. formed a coalition and went to oust Saddams regime...in case you didn't know...

Coalition?



Oh yes - the Mighty Coalition!

Which did Break International Laws - since the Invasion is still considered Illegal.

Therefore making the Occupation also Illegal.

What else is Illegal in the War on Terrorism?

Let's check out!

First - Illegal abuse of Human Rights of Iraqi Citizens, by using Chemical and Nuclear Weapons in Iraq (WP, DU) and other Illegal Ammunitions (Napalm, Cluster bombs).

Second - breaking of Geneva Conventions regarding the Prisoners of War.

Three - seen any Illegal Corruptions in new Iraq Grey Area of Law? Like Stolen Iraq Billions? Where did they go?

Four - breaking International Law by Kidnapping citizens of Other countries.

Just to name a few.

Yeah well except that we are talking about terrorist attacks....not an invasion by Saddam's forces...

Yes - and how does that Change the situation?

Wouldn't a Terrorist Attack on US soil, executed by Saddam result in All-Out-War-on-Iraq anyway?

You are Funny!

Right...the souljah doesn't want to believe what other countries have to say about Saddam's ties with terrorism, ties with Al Qaeda, or what other countries say about terrorism in their own soil, he just wants to listen to the "insurgents/terrorists" and try to place the blame on the U.S. for everything, even if it means exagerating, and lying... I forgot about that.

First - I love how you decided to write my name, starting with small s-ouljah, while you write Al-Qaeda with Big Initial Letters.



Funny yet again!

Correct me, if I am wrong, but didn't CIA establish Al-Qaeda in the First Place?

Correct me, if I am wrong, but isn't the Bin Laden Family - Family of the No.1 Supper-Terrorist - in close business and other connections with the House of Saud?

To me it looks like Al-Qaeda has MORE connections to Bush&Co, then Saddam ever did!

Funny thing again - Saddam was Afraid of Al-Qaeda.

But ofcourse, that is strongly against the PR-O's version of the Story:

Saddam = Bad!

Bush = Good!

Brainwashing Completed.

Next!

Right and the Iranian president has not stated that Israel should be wiped off the map, and that countries that try to stop Iran from acquiring nuclear technology will burn for it...among some of the other things he has claimed....

Ok - let's check out Other Nations with Nuclear Weapons; hey, they are all a bunch of War Mongering countries anyway. How many wars have Russia, United States, Great Britain, France, China started? How many has Iran? How many Isreal? How many has Iraq? How many has Afganistan? How many has Pakistan? How many has India? How many has North Korea? Interesting observation, ain' it?

But all of the countries Above HAVE Nuclear Weapons and they created this "Game" a Pathetic and completly Stupid Nuclear Rat Race, which decided who goes UP to the Elite Few Morons, that already possess this Weapons of Mass Destruction and Genocide - yet they all Claim to be Demoratic, Free and above all CIVILIZED:

That my friend is not the Mirror of a Civilization - but a Mirror of Destruction.

It is not like the president of Iran wants to bring the world into chaos so his 12th imam can come back and bring Islamic rule over the world....

Who knows - it just Might happen!

I don't hate Iranians, in fact I know some Iranian engineers who work in the U.S. for the same company I work for. What i don't really like is that the Iranian regime has been stating for years, and now more than ever... You know things such as "wiping Israel off the map", "making those countries which have tried, and try to stop Iran from acquiring nuclear technology burn for it". Having a senior Mullah state "it is alright for Iran to acquire nuclear weapons and for Iran to use nuclear weapons"....

I didn't mean that way, that you Hate people of Iran - I ment that in context of the "Hate the Game - Not the Playa" statement. You feel any safer, knowing that you are somehow "Protected" by several thousand nuclear warheads, which could completly and utter destroy all Life known on Planet Earth? Well I sure do not.

They just wanna play with the Big Guys with the Biggest Toys.

Sorry Dude - but that's da Game.

Like India and Pakistan - which both have Nuclear capabilities, and ask yourself, are they stabile? There is a place called Kashmir somehwere between India and Pakistan, and it is not a good place to be.

Suddenly, when they Aquire Nuclear weapons, president Bush comes to greet them.

Will he come to Iran like that also, when they get theirs?



[edit on 13/5/06 by Souljah]

The utter fallaciousness of this^^ argument is mind boggling! Not only does it not answer any of the premises it makes but also deftly sidesteps the issue so as to obfuscate the argument further and try to mire it in controversy.

In short, it is safe to assume that this is nothing more than the vapid and venal rants of those who dwell on the infamy of others.

[edit on 14-5-2006 by IAF101]

You have voted IAF101 for the Way Above Top Secret award. You have one more vote left for this month.

Well said.

-- Boat

Seriously, in one full year, Iran will be mostly out of the news and out of your heads. There will have been no nuclear exchange, and no all out war in the middle east. America will be in some other venture somewhere else in the world, I am guessing they may decide to go back to SouthEast asia. Been awhile since theyve been there hasnt it? Perhaps a democrat will take office and there will actually be a moment of prosperity again

I honestly would not worry a nickel about this Iran situation. It will go away, just like North Korea. I don't recall there has been any battles in that area like many of us predicted now is there?

Originally posted by IAF101
Fact one, After the US involvment in IRAQ there hasnt been a single act of terrorism in continental USA.

And how often were there terror attacks on American soil before that? It's not like that kind of thing happens every month. If one happens again, I'm sure you'll switch gears and ask the government to take away more of your rights.

FAct two, There is much more awareness and greater pressure on terrrorists in the world today that ever before.

No, there's more pressure on the civilians of Iraq and of Afghanistan. The US is not even touching the borderlands between Afghanistan and Pakistan where a lot of the Taliban and al Qaeda remnants remain. Even before the attack on Afghanistan occurred, Bush was asking his advisors to find a way to blame it on Iraq.

Fact three, due to the unprecedented levels of policing in the USA it is much much harder for terrorists to operate inside the USA.

There are a multitude of examples of how unsecure America is. Examples include the porous borders AND coastlines.

In short, the USA has taken the fight to the terrorist's door step and we wage war in their living rooms.

Whose living room? There is still no solid connection with Iraq. And, in Afghanistan, the US is still avoiding all the right places.

In the words of the late Golda Meir the USA also seeks to -" cut off the hand of the ones who hurt us. "

And that would be Iraq? It seems the most solid evidence for an al-Qaeda - Sadaam/Iraq connection comes from the translation of supposed Iraqi documents made by an anonymous internet poster.

[edit on 14-5-2006 by Jamuhn]

Originally posted by Jamuhn
And how often were there terror attacks on American soil before that?

Well there was the twin towers bombings, the 9/11 plane-meets-buildings, the pentagon-meets-plane and another one intended crash a plane into capitol hill. These are the most recent ones. Also there was that Oklahoma city bombing, that can be considered a terrorist attack.

No, there's more pressure on the civilians of Iraq and of Afghanistan. The US is not even touching the borderlands between Afghanistan and Pakistan where a lot of the Taliban and al Qaeda remnants remain.

I am sure you can call Osama Bin Laden a civilian on Afganistan and so are the Taliban- citizens of Afganistan. Then in Iraq you have Saddam Hussein -citizen/former dictator of Iraq, the Bath Party-all citizens of Iraq and Al-Zarqawi& his gang-defacto citizen of the Islamic Caliphate(which includes IRaq). So in otherwords, all these civilians are pressured and you find that wrong ??

The "borderlands" as you would call it, is Waziristan which is under Pakistand Soverign rule and it is the Pakistani Forces that are engaged in clearing up that area of all rabble and other deviant elements. For the initiated, the Pakistanis give out regular updates on their kills. Obviously they are doing their best to cover up their part in the support to the Taliban and Al-Qaeda but the pressure is still "on" . Do you expect the US to "invade" the region, take it over from Pakistan and risk shaking the balance in the region ?

There are a multitude of examples of how unsecure America is. Examples include the porous borders AND coastlines.

The security of America today is much greater than it ever was, that is a fact. Are there some unsecure zones? yes there are but overall it is more secure today than ever before, thats a fact.

Whose living room? There is still no solid connection with Iraq. And, in Afghanistan, the US is still avoiding all the right places.

There is no connection between Iraq and 9/11 but not Al-Qaeda. There is suffecient links between Iraq and Al-qaeda. Iraq is responsible for funding suicide bombers in Israel, in providing logistics to Al-Qaeda etc.

It seems the most solid evidence for an al-Qaeda - Sadaam/Iraq connection comes from the translation of supposed Iraqi documents made by an anonymous internet poster

That might be the scope of your understanding on this issue but I suggest you seach ATS more carefully and derive a better understand of the links between Saddam and islamic terrorism.

Originally posted by IAF101

Originally posted by Jamuhn
And how often were there terror attacks on American soil before that?

Well there was the twin towers bombings, the 9/11 plane-meets-buildings, the pentagon-meets-plane and another one intended crash a plane into capitol hill. These are the most recent ones.

That was one string of terrorist attacks, all coordinated together and should be treated as one. If you intend to break those out, then you are merely playing semantics and not addressing the core of my question.

I am sure you can call Osama Bin Laden a civilian on Afganistan and so are the Taliban- citizens of Afganistan. Then in Iraq you have Saddam Hussein -citizen/former dictator of Iraq, the Bath Party-all citizens of Iraq and Al-Zarqawi& his gang-defacto citizen of the Islamic Caliphate(which includes IRaq). So in otherwords, all these civilians are pressured and you find that wrong ??

Once again, you are playing semantics. Here, you would like to call them citizens, but then you'll turn around and call the insurgents, terrorists, or whatever label you determine would be best for your argument in another instance. A civilian is technically definted as a non-military person, so your logic is wrong here.

The "borderlands" as you would call it, is Waziristan which is under Pakistand Soverign rule

Iraq and Afghanistan were under sovereign rule as well. Most countries are under sovereign rule, except for maybe psuedo-countries like Palestine.

and it is the Pakistani Forces that are engaged in clearing up that area of all rabble and other deviant elements. For the initiated, the Pakistanis give out regular updates on their kills.

So you would trust the hunt for the man and followers supposedly responsible for 9/11 to a third-party? I realize that outsourcing is a major trend among American business now, but I didn't realize it was being extended to the "security" and military operations as well. But, since Bush doesn't care about that guy bin-Laden anymore, why should we, right?

The security of America today is much greater than it ever was, that is a fact. Are there some unsecure zones? yes there are but overall it is more secure today than ever before, thats a fact.

Is it? Are you secure from car-crashes, disease, cancer and violent crimes, more so than any other year? In what terms are you measuring "more secure"? Are we ever really secure? How far will this fear of terrorism push you? Will it push you to give up the very freedoms that this supposed war was designed to protext?

There is no connection between Iraq and 9/11 but not Al-Qaeda. There is suffecient links between Iraq and Al-qaeda. Iraq is responsible for funding suicide bombers in Israel, in providing logistics to Al-Qaeda etc.

You mean Iraq was giving money to the family of palestinian suicide bombers fighting against the Israeli occupation? I'm not sure what that has to to do with al-Qaeda. Did you just decide to add it to the end of your sentence to make it seem like there was a connection?

That might be the scope of your understanding on this issue but I suggest you seach ATS more carefully and derive a better understand of the links between Saddam and islamic terrorism.

I can name a few countries responsible for all brands of "terrorism" Islamic and not, including the US. So what's your point about Iraq?

[edit on 14-5-2006 by Jamuhn]